Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What loved one's do you think he was threatening? The family dog? Second cousin once removed? Uncle-in-law.and after you shoot and kill their driver the police can draw a chalk outline around your child's dead body.
But it fun how you keep up with the child claim even after admitting you made it up.
Do we know he is wrong without an investigation?What loved one's do you think he was threatening? The family dog? Second cousin once removed? Uncle-in-law.
Don't be a dunce, we're doing so well today.
From his perspective, he now has the phone, the person and the car that will link to the kidnapper.
With hindsight be know he is wrong...but that would make sense to him. He has improved the chances that his loved one will not be killed.
You give them the money while they kill your kid anyway and send you their head back in a box. Now you have nothing because you didn’t call the police who were well aware of the suspects. They could have arrested them if they only knew what was happening and saved your kids life. Hope you are happy.
See I can make up a bullshit story also you are not special.
Grow the fuck up, jerk off.Such an unimaginative response admitting you can not dispute my facts. First and foremost, why disparage children when you are frustrated with you inability to respond to points well made.
People who disparage children have low intelligence. Hence, you giving up with the ridiculous point you attempted to make.
You firstGrow the fuck up, jerk off.
By shooting someone he thought was an accomplice. That in no way improves the chances his loved one would not be harmed,EXACTLY! You can't pay them the money and you can't NOT pay them the money.
Like I said in the last post...
From his perspective, he now has the phone, the person and the car that will link to the kidnapper.
With hindsight be know he is wrong...but that would make sense to him. He has improved the chances that his loved one will not be killed.
Twisting like this is gonna get you hospitalized.EXACTLY! You can't pay them the money and you can't NOT pay them the money.
Like I said in the last post...
From his perspective, he now has the phone, the person and the car that will link to the kidnapper.
With hindsight we know he is wrong...but that would make sense to him. He has...again, from his perspective... improved the chances that his loved one will not be killed.
That’s why Uber drivers need to be able to carry guns. They need to be fast tracked to carry…
81-year-old Ohio man charged for the murder of Black Uber driver
William Brock shot unarmed 61-year-old Loletha Hall outside his home after confiscating her phone and blocking her from leaving.www.revolt.tv
he must have had some mental issue. at 81 if they can proove that he will go t o the nut house. terribly sad my gosh.
Now wait a minute I haven’t read this. This would be groundbreaking. Are you saying that the Uber driver in the case of the original post… took part in a plot to try and rob the 81-year-old man?Wow, it seems somebody was literally trying to rob this man and the Uber driver somehow got involved.
Everyone knows old white men are racist killers so why would a black woman get involved in this robbery taking action to put her life in jail?
This seems like another story of, "let the black people rob old white men".
Do not defend yourself from crime, on your own property, even if it was someone you did not call or request to come, trespasses on your property while committing the crime.
No...it doesn't. You now have the accomplice, the accomplices phone AND the accomplices car.By shooting someone he thought was an accomplice. That in no way improves the chances his loved one would not be harmed,
It does the exact opposite that’s why that logic falls apart
BS.Twisting like this is gonna get you hospitalized.
What loved one's do you think he was threatening? The family dog? Second cousin once removed? Uncle-in-law.
Don't be a dunce, we're doing so well today.
From his perspective, he now has the phone, the person and the car that will link to the kidnapper.
With hindsight be know he is wrong...but that would make sense to him. He has...again, from his perspective... improved the chances that his loved one will not be killed.
Now wait a minute I haven’t read this. This would be groundbreaking. Are you saying that the Uber driver in the case of the original post… took part in a plot to try and rob the 81-year-old man?
But in your example you didn’t give them the money you shot the bagman before he could make the payoff, endangering your loved one.No...it doesn't. You now have the accomplice, the accomplices phone AND the accomplices car.
One of them is likely to lead police back to the kidnapper.
You're in a far better position than either giving them the money or not giving them the money.
It could.And there is no way killing one of the criminals would make it more likely they give your kid back. All that will do is piss them off more
It should also be noted again, according to the prosecutor he knew it was a scam....
An 81-year-old Ohio man pleaded not guilty to multiple counts of murder and other charges Wednesday related to the shooting death of an Uber driver he mistakenly believed was working with a scammer attempting to extort him, according to the Clark County prosecutor.
Tried to detain, you mean. He didn't just shoot her outright.But in your example you didn’t give them the money you shot the bagman before he could make the payoff, endangering your loved one.
This statement is only a statement of fact...that Brock believed the victim was an accomplice of the person who claimed to have kidnapped a member of the shooter's family. That person turned out to be a scammer...but that in no way is a claim that the shooter knew it was a scam at the time.
The kidnappers still are not being paid and you keep saying that is endangering them. So shooting, detaining however you want to phrase it is by your own standards gambling with your loved ones life.Tried to detain, you mean. He didn't just shoot her outright.
